Re: Star Grunt 2 : Whenit finaly comes together.

On Mon, 26 May 1997, Alexander Williams wrote:

> Darryl Adams wrote:
> > 1. The game is being run as a demo at SAGA 97.
> 
> Then you should have playtested it at least a half-dozen times, points
> or no points.

Which we plan to do. We still have time to do it properly, but due to
work
constraints, my time has been limited. 

Lets get one thing clear here. I dont have to run this. I want to
promote
the game, as it is the best futuristic small combat system I have seen.

I posted the origional post for feedback, which I am thankfull of
recieving, and for other ideas. When Mikko (?sp) posted his origional
thread about points, I did not enter the debate because I felt that a)
lack of experince and b) agreement on the point that scenerios should
guide the army list.

Now that we had a serious game with all elements in it, we are still
impressed by the game. 

Given that the demo game is a free form format (we supply the table,
rules
and figures if needed, and the players supply the time and fun) we did
not
feel we had to be SGII propeller heads. 

But given that Australia is heavily dominated by GW, and that many
people
are disenchanted with the Model of the Week and excessive price rises,
we
NEED to cater for those who are use to points (GW players plus Modern
and
WWII).

While it is all well and good to say that you must structure the game
for
the scenrio, in the stituation we finds ourselves in, we feel that a
point
system will serve us well.

> > 3. Technolagy is hard to guage (while Mick had numerical supiority,
I had
> > the tech supiority).
> 
> Yes it is without having done the playtesting.  Points are no measure
of
> that, either.

We know the technolagy. Bith players have played enouth DSII to know the
impact of lasers and plasma and grav. Sice the scaling is different you
have "twists" that you do not expect.

> > 4. Mick was also lucky as my gunship aborted in turn 2 due to air
defence
> > (It was also a green unit, it survivability was questionable)
> 
> A point system doesn't address the above, either.  Your Green gunship
> doesn't make it through air defense the first time out, and aborts,
> being effectively useless.  How many points is it worth?  Your Green
> gunship makes it through the air defenses and through a series of
lucky
> rolls, takes out a couple of his critical units at just the right
time. 
> Now how much is it worth?  

If it got to the field, it would have been worth the points. I aborted
because I dare not risk losing it. I valued the asset, so in a way, i
gave
it a point value (I can risk the APC , but not the Gunship) 

> 
> > All this cries out for points. Sure I have no problems allowing
scenerios
> > to define force deployments, but until we have a better undertanding
of
> > what effect any given unit can have in battle, a point system would
be
> > nice.
> 
> A point system won't do anything to address the problems you mention
> above.  Rough point system: ARMOUR + total weapon SIZE.  This will
give
> you a very general feel for the power of a unit, but its not going to
> really help you figure out the things mentioned above.
> 
> > Fine in theory, but for a demo game , and aiming at people jerked of
GW, a
> > point system will allow them to slide into the system better.
> 
> Then you should have playtested the scenario /before/ the con, with
> half-a-dozen folks to see if it shakes out.  A Con is /not/ the time
to
> experiment, and most especially not with newbies.

We are "PROMOTING" the game. We are encouraging people to bring whatever
minitures they have to try the system out with. We want people who are
willing to play the game so we can have people to play against.

Yes it would be nice to have a nice netted out scenerio, but without
knowledge of players and pefered units, it would be a waste of time.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
Darryl Adams
dadams@tig.com.au

"The rich kid becomes a junkie,
The poor kid , advertising,
What a tragic waste of potential
Being a junkie is not great either"

TISM : "Greg the Stop Sign"